President Obama used a live interview with Katie Couric to announce his plans for a bi-partisan health care reform summit, openly inviting Republicans to participate in the process.
Some saw this as a move of weakness, possibly admitting defeat on health care. I don’t see it that way. I see this as a bold political move that makes Republicans try to figure out exactly how much “bi-partisanship” America really wants.
Bi-partisanship is a funny thing. Generally, voters seem to want it to happen, however, if they really wanted it, the ‘Productive’ Party would be in charge and the Republicans and Democrats would be the Libertarians and Green parties of our system. But as we know, that’s not the case.
But, back to the Health Care Summit. President Obama realizes that the GOP has been able sit back and watch his health care reform package suffer from plenty of disagreement within Obama’s own party. They really haven’t been forced to participate in the process, and since there are very few fans of the process, they have enjoyed that luxury.
But President Obama’s offer puts the ball firmly in their court. But like an Andy Roddick serve coming at them at 140mph, it’s a dangerous ball to have coming at you.
Here are your two scenarios.
The first scenario has the GOP take President Obama up on his offer and they decide to work with Democrats on Health Care reform. While many of their pet issues are ignored, they actually get a few bones thrown to them in the process. With just enough Republican ideas in the legislation, the watered down proposal passes.
Under this scenario, if voters really want bi-partisanship, the GOP looks like heroes and they have an even greater advantage going into November. However, to get that advantage, they sell their soul in the process via health care reform. If any of those angry voters were really angry at the idea of Health Care reform, and couldn’t care less about bi-partisanship, the GOP loses that angry momentum and more than likely, many November races.
The second scenario is the GOP continues to stall and refuses to offer any help or input. While being known as a party that sticks to their guns, some of them literally, they would also cement their reputation as the party of ‘no’. If they underestimated voters’ real desire to see bi-partisanship, or worse, real health care reform, they could see their early 2010 advantage disappear quickly.
Voters are funny. In 2008, you would have thought that voters wanted health care reform so bad that they would punish any party of the “no” for even thinking of standing in the way. Fast forward to 2010 and some voters around the country are making it look like they will punish the party of “Yes, we can”.
So, do voters want to see real bi-partisan health care reform or would they rather see no reform at all? That’s the $64,000 dollar question.
The good news is that neither you nor I have to answer that question. Thanks to President Obama, only the GOP needs to answer it now. The trick is, will they get it right?